Organic Retailing In Australia

Go Organic . . . It's all Good . . . catchcrys that once had meaning. How do we get the organic industry in Australia back on track, focused on what it was born to undertake? Should Consumers pay their hard Earned for overpriced organic product? Why is there such a large Price Variance between (organic) retailers on like for like product. Does commercial viability truly mean giving up all ethics. Surely the larger retailers are able to grow this industry with the Organic Ethos!

Friday

300% markup or just bad buying?

Should Consumers pay their hard Earned for overpriced organic product?
Why is there such a large Price Variance between retailers on like for like product, is it ALL buying power?
Consumers should not wear overpriced product because Organic Chains can't get their act together!
Organic will always cost more, how much more is a reasonable question!
We understand the commercial side of this industry, does this truly mean giving up all ethics,
surely the larger retailers are able to grow this industry with the Organic Ethos!

We note that one retailer has now started filling it's racking with conventional/mainstream Product WTF?
This Industry is about more than the Bottom Line . . . it's about life, coexistence, sustainability, community & wellbeing.

The commercial viability of this industry needs to be focused on support for local content/producers, not a grab for cheap imported product that are flogged to the consumer at ridiculously inflated prices!

In this industry only 3 things exist : Good Producers : Ethical Resellers & Above All, The Customer! This is after all Just Retail?

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Election Promise?

Daily Telegraph

By Glenn Milne

March 09, 2008 12:00am

PREMIER Morris Iemma has

attacked a plan by his federal

Labor colleagues to

introduce a $1 plastic

shopping bag tax.

BIG grocery retailers have

warned consumers the Rudd

Government will introduce a

compulsory charge of between

25 cents and $1for each plastic

checkout bag.

As families are being hit by

spiralling interest rates and

inflation, Labor's Environment

Minister Peter Garrett is moving

to introduce the charge on

shoppers in a bid to protect the

environment.

Mr Iemma said today he had

not been consulted about the

plan but he believed it would

impose an unreasonable cost

on consumers at a time of

already rising prices.

"Placing a dollar tax on

hardworking families will just

boost their grocery bills,'' Mr

Iemma told reporters in Sydney

today.

"If you've got three or four

kids ... that's upwards of $10

increase in your grocery bill."

But Coles and Woolworths

believe the ``shopping tax'' will

cost shoppers

anywherebetween $650 million

and $2.5 billion a year,

depending on the extent to

which consumers phase out

their use of the plastic bags.

The $650 million figure is based

on a charge per bag of 25 cents

to be levied by the retailer at

the checkout.

While this is believed to be the

cost Federal Treasury and Mr

Garret are proposing, some

state governments in private

discussions have raised the

prospect of a $1 charge per

bag, which would net some

$2.5 billion.

The Sunday Telegraph has

learned that former NSW

environment minister Phil

Koperburg had told senior

grocery industry figures a

charge of $1 was preferred in

this state.

Retailers believe the levy would

force only 30 per cent of

shoppers to immediately cease

use of all plastic bags, with 70

per cent continuing to use the

bags and being forced to pay

the charge.

The average weekly family

shop, according to the

supermarket giants, involves a

dozen plastic bags. At 25 cents

a bag it would mean an extra

$156 a year minimum on the

household budget. At $1 a bag,

the figure spirals to $624.

The costs are based on Clean

Up Australia's estimates, which

suggest there are 3.76 billion

plastic bags issued a year.

Environment group Planet Ark

puts it at more than five billion.

The grocery chains are

concerned they will face the

brunt of any consumer backlash

against the new charge, which

is on the agenda for a state and

federal ministerial council

meeting of environment

ministers on April 17.

The Rudd government went to

the election witha policy to

``use economic instruments'' to

reduce the use of plastic bags.

Laws requiring the supermarket

chains to impose the charge

would come at state level, but

with wall-to-wall Labor

governments, this is regarded

as a fait accompli.

The Rudd Government is wary

that the i ndustry and

consumers will label the levy a

"new tax'' so it will force the

supermarkets to impose it,

rather than the government.

This raises questions as to

where the huge windfall to the

retail giants would be spent,

and where the money would go

in the case of smaller

supermarkets.

But the industry says there has

been no discussion with the

government on this aspect of

the issue.

They say at a time when Prime

Minister Kevin Rudd has

promised to do all he can to

bring down family living costs, it

is an extra impost.

"People are already focussed

on the price of what's going in

the bag,'' said one industry

figure. "Now they'll need to

worry about the costs of the

bag itself.''

Another senior industry source

said: "Even if everyone

switched immediately to green

bags - which they won't - at $1

a bag this will add around $12 a

shop for the average working

family for their initial shop after

the plastic charge is introduced.

But there will be ongoingcosts

each time they've forgotten (to

take) their bags to the

supermarket.

The life cycle of the green bags

is also over-stated - so one

would assume that many

families would be replacing

them regularly during the year.''

Industry sources also say the

environmental concerns over

plastic bags have to be

weighed against the much

bigger carbon impact of

producing and transporting

heavier material green bags.

Rather than a ban or a levy, the

supermarket giants would

prefer that the government

funds a research and

development study into the use

of biodegradable plastic bags.

Senior government sources

declined to respond directly to

the industry claims, saying a

number of options would be on

the table at the April 17

ministerial council meeting.

But they confirmed that a

compulsory bag charge would

be among them.

They said Mr Garrett's preferred

option did not involve a "new

tax'' and that a "compulsory

charge'' would be much simpler

for supermarkets to administer

than acquitting a tax.

"It would be much simpler for

them (the supermarkets) to

administer than a tax and they

could still blame governments

for the charge,'' a government

source said.

"The whole point would be to

set the price of plastic bags so

that consumers very rapidly

stopped buying them and

adopted reusable bags.''

The source also suggested that

supermarkets could use the

revenue raised to set up

environmental funds.